I Can’t Believe “Star Trek” Lied To Me

By Gordon Hopkins While the science in “Star Trek” has always been a tad suspect, the original TV show and its ever-multiplying spinoffs are usually set far enough in the future to apply Arthur C. Clarke's famous maxim, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”Oh, I'm sure that the writers tried to at least get the basics right. But it has to be said, and I'm sure this isn't their fault, but they messed up big time in one of their biggest predictions. That glaring mistake can be summed up in two words: insufficient data. Whenever the computer of the Starship Enterprise (usually voiced by “Star Trek” creator gene Roddenberry's wife, Majel Barrett) was presented with a problem and it didn't know the answer, the computer would spit out two terse words: insufficient data.Today, of course, we know better. Today's AI (Artificial Intelligence) will never say “insufficient data” or “I don't know” or “beat's me, fella.” Instead, AI will just make something up.Attorneys using AI to write briefs for them have learned this the hard way when they discovered said briefs cited case laws that never existed. Their careers ended up being just like those case laws, nonexistent.Now those lies being told by AI are creating a whole new legal headache. Like everyone else, Google, the company behind the biggest search engine in the Solar System, has decided to get into the AI game. AI has become like cilantro. Some chefs just want to put it on everything.Google now offers an “AI Overview,” which is an AI-generated summary of search results. It’s supposed to be helpful. Unfortunately, these summaries, while certainly concise and convenient, are also quite often wrong. If you type in “AI Overview” into Google and look at the AI Overview, it will tell you, “AI Overviews, like any AI-powered system, can sometimes produce inaccurate or misleading information.”Indeed, I've seen some of my own stories mangled by Google's AI Overview.And that takes us to the new legal headache I mentioned. Google is now being sued by a Minnesota-based solar energy company, Wolf River Electric, which claims Google's AI is telling lies about the company. According to attorneys representing Wolf River Electric, “Google was producing and publishing statements on the internet that falsely informed the public that Wolf River was facing a lawsuit from the Minnesota Attorney General.”All of which raises interesting legal questions, not he least of which is, can a machine be guilty of defamation? Wolf River Electric is, indeed, suing Google for defamation. The company is asking for damages in excess of $110 million to $210 million and demanding that “the internet publications must be removed because they are false, defamatory, or unlawful.”Google has denied the allegation of defamation, although it does not deny that its AI was not telling the truth about Wolf River Electric. Instead Google dismisses the matter as an oopsy. In a statement to Politico, Google said, “The vast majority of our AI Overviews are accurate and helpful but like with any new technology, mistakes can happen.” The big problem here is not that AI is inherently bad. AI has the potential to be a very valuable tool. The problem is that companies are trying to use AI as a replacement for people.A guy with a screwdriver can fix a lot of things. A screwdriver without a guy to use it can't fix anything.This is why I am terrified of news outlets letting AI write news stories. By all means, use AI to compile data. Ask it questions. That's fine. But, for Pete's (and everybody else's) sake, don't use AI-generated content as your final product, whether that is a news story, legal brief, scientific paper or term paper. AI can streamline the work but only a person can make certain the work isn't made up.

Fairbury Issues Water Conservation Notice

Bonnie Buchli

Related Articles

Are Marshmallow Peeps the New Pumpkin Spice?

Again

Time Marches On (But I Don’t)

The Year of the Fire Horse